164 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



C2na S. NO 113., Fkb. 27. '58. 



folio, and for the restoring of the plural make, I 

 affirm, at variance with every one of the former 

 commentators, that "the voice of all the gods" is 

 in apposition to " love speaking," to the sentence, 

 *' when love speaks;" that in the voice of love is 

 included the voice of all the gods, as Warburton 

 rightly observes, though he both misinterprets 

 and corrupts the lines, two events as inseparable 

 as cause and effect. 



And when love speaks the voice of all the gods 

 speaks the voice, that is his misinterpretation : — 

 " Mark ! heaven drowsy with the harmony." 



Mark, substituted for make, that is his corrup- 

 tion. 



To conclude with " porridge after meat." At 

 p. 6. of " N". & Q " (2"<» S. v.), writing upon the 

 lines — 



" The harlot's cheek, beautied with plastering art, 

 Is not more ugly to the thing that helps it, 

 Than is misdeed to my most painted word." 



Hamlet, Act III. Sc. 1. 



among other things, Mr. Keightlet says : " I am 

 also Inclined to read unlike for ugly ; for, as far as 

 I know, ugly to, only occurs in the phrase ugly to 

 the eye. To personify paint and word would be 

 rather too bold." 



These observations of Mr. Kbightlet's are 

 certainly very striking ; and though I cannot say 

 of his proposed alteration, as he does of the " old" 

 commentator's corruption of the line In Winter's 

 Tale (Act IV. Sc. 3.), that It is an " admirable 

 correction," yet, I frankly confess, it gives no 

 ambiguous weight to his authority, in endorsing 

 with his admiration that particular corruption. 



My understanding of these words of Hamlet 

 proceeded from the idea, that to meant compared 

 to ; and Johnson, by his note on the place, ap- 

 pears to have been of the same mind. Before 

 assenting to Mr. Keightley's suggested change, 

 one might like to have the scruples removed 

 which a few passages such as the following pro- 

 voke : — 



" Ham. So excellent a king ; that was to this 

 Hyperion to a Satyr." 7- Hamlet, Act I. Sc. 2. 



" Ghost And to decline 



Upon a wretch, whose natural gifts were poor, 

 To those of mine." — lb., Act I. Sc. 5. 



" Mer. Lama to his lady was but a kitchen wench." 

 Romeo and Juliet, Act II. Sc. 4. 



" Val. There is no woe to his correction, 

 Nor to his service no such joy on earth." 



Two Gentlemen of Verona, Act II. Sc. 4. 



And again, a few lines farther on : — 



" Pardon me Proteus : all I can, is nothing 

 To her, whose worth makes other worthies nothing." 



" Herbert," says Johnson commenting on the 

 use of to in the former passage, "called for the 

 prayers of the Liturgy a little before his death, 

 saying, ' None to them, none to them.* " 



Mr. Fairholt remarks (2"^ S. v. 106.), on the 

 \Tord goatch met with by him in a chnp-book, that 

 he does not find it in our glossaries. The term is 

 quite familiar to me, though I have not heard it 

 for many years ; at one period of my life, either 

 at school (in Rutland), or at College (in Cam- 

 bridgeshire), more probably the latter, I used to 

 hear an earthen pitcher called by no other name. 

 Bailey has the word, but spelt as pronounced, 

 gotch ; and Ash copies it from Bailey. Mr. Fair- 

 holt will, however, find it in a ballad that used 

 to be a great favourite among young folk of my 

 acquaintance, "Richard and Kate," by Bloom- 

 field : — 



" When once a giggling mawther you, 



And I a red-faced chubby boy. 

 Sly tricks you played me not a few ; 



For mischief was your greatest joy. 



" Once, passing by this very tree, 

 A gotch of miUi I'd been to fill. 

 You shoulder'd me ; then laugh'd to see 

 Me and my gotch spin down the hill." 



W. R. Arrowsmith. 

 Kinsham Court. 



Shakspeare, the First Folio. — I have been 

 lately examining a copy of the " First Folio " of 

 Shakspeare's works. I find that Troilus and Cres- 

 sida (which in all the descriptions I have seen of 

 the " First Folio " is stated as Included in it) is 

 not inserted in the catalogue of plays. Further- 

 more, In the book itself IVoilus and Cressida is 

 evidently Inserted from some other edition, as the 

 paging is all wrong. My object in writing this 

 is to ask, 1. Whether other copies of the "First 

 Folio " are known without Troilus and Cressida ? 

 2. To which edition do the inserted leaves belong ? 

 It is not the second ; probably the third or fourth, 

 which I have not by me. The second leaf is paged 

 79,80. The other leaves have no paginal numbers. 

 My folio is, I may mention, in excellent preser- 

 vation, and the binding at least one hundred years 

 old. G. H. K. 



Shakspeare's Sonnets ; Hathaway the Drama' 

 tist. — Having noticed In an article on Rev. A. 

 Dyce's " Shakspeare " in The Athenmum, that 

 Mr. Collier is " working anew " on his Hie of this 

 poet, I feel anxious, through your aid, of placing 

 before him the following conjecture, which, where 

 so much is conjectural, may not be too wild or 

 far-fetched to merit some investigation. " The 

 only begetter " of the dedication of Shakspeare's 

 Sonnets is as yet undiscovered. The guesses al- 

 ready made have, so far as I know, violated in 

 some of its elements the law of probability ; so 

 that a new guess, if probable, may be admissible, 

 as enabling commentators to " take a new de- 

 parture." 



I find in a list of dramatic authors of " the 



